And check out McCain from this morning’s Washington Post: “To encourage a country with only rhetoric, rather than sound and proven ideas that trust in the strength and courage of free people, is not a promise of hope. It is a platitude.”

It seems that Obama has had plenty of practice countering this argument, which has been a mainstay of the Clinton campaign, and done pretty well with it so far.

Yes, this argument has been getting way too much play lately. It seems to go like this: because Obama is great at the poetry part of campaigning, that means he must not be good at the prose part. But it is demonstrably untrue. Obama has offered just as much policy detail as Clinton, and in several areas he has offered more detailed policy commitments while Clinton has taken the fifth, so to speak, and deferred to some bipartisan commission she claims she will appoint to decide the issue. Or she has said that she cannot provide details because she doesn't want to "tip her hand".

The Clinton campaign needs to stop reinforcing the McCain argument.

Don't kid yourself about what the "plan of attack" is going to be. Sure it might be the "empty platitude" angle, but that will be a minor theme. As you say. McCains platform stinks and he will not try to harp on that general subject.

McCain will hit Obama with a) Racist innuendo, b) Was a former Muslim crap, and c) inexperience. The last will be in contrast to his own substantial experience in foreign policy. Obama simply does not have a lot of experience in that field. He was at one point suggesting he was going to bomb Pakistan if it had a chance to get OBL. Not a diplomatic thing to say about a country that is a) nominally our ally in the "war on terror" and b) has nuclear weapons.

It's not going to be pretty Jared so don't delude yourself. The gloves are going to come off pretty quickly if and when he clinches the nomination.

Man, reading Jared Bernstein is like watching a box of kittens wander around on a freeway. He's so wide eyed, innocent and fuzzy... and he has no clue about that semi-truck bearing down on him.

Okay, let's take a look:

It’s an obvious strategy: try to turn your opponent’s strength into his weakness. But it’s nuts.

Worked incredibly well on John Kerry, Al Gore, and a host of Democrats whose careers are marked by tombstones. So let's not go writing it off just yet...

Both Obama and Clinton are incredibly beefy, with policy agendas that are more robust and carefully thought out than that any presidential bid in recent memory. On health care reform alone, they’re trailblazing.

They're also both pretty much the same. Obama's policy agenda is essentially right/centrist. That's very important. Keep this in mind, because Bernstein also writes:

Obama appears to be riding an inspirational wave that is resonating deeply, far more than policy minutiae would at this point in time.

There's the Republican's point of attack. Bernstein literally trips over it, and still doesn't recognize it.

Obama's 'inspirational wave' is not connected to his policy and program agenda. Indeed, I'd argue that it's somewhat antithetical to it. Obama's inspirational wave is about 'political transformation', about appealing to the powerful desire for a progressive or liberal fantasy figure. He's a vegan dream. Obama's beefy wonkery doesn't match up.

Progressive/left inspirational waves, and centrist/conservative policy platforms are horses going in two directions. The desire to be out of Iraq is met with a play to withdraw slowly over a year and a half, leave residual forces, and go back in any time. The desire for universal health care runs up against some goofball plan for another bastardized optional system to funnel money into corporations. The quest to rebuild America's reputation, gets transmuted into a bellicose threat to bomb Pakistan.

And there's the wedge that McCain will drive like a stake into Obama, and its the wedge that the Republicans will use to start taking apart a President Obama. By focusing on the gap between image and substance in Obama.

McCain, whatever you might think of him, lines up pretty much between policy and image. You might not think much of his continuing commitment to Iraq - but you're sure that he's going to do his damnedest to win, and he's not going to pussyfoot around. If he doesn't know much about economics, well, he's sure to try and do something.

But it wouldn’t hurt him and the Democrats’ cause, especially as the primaries move into states buffeted by the economic downsides of globalization, like Wisconsin and Ohio, to emphasize his plans for addressing these challenges. He’s got deep beef and so does she.

"Deep beef" what an appalling metaphor. It's like Jared's channelling Friedman after a week strapped to a table in a gay bathhouse. Deep beef indeed.

It's clear that Bernstein doesn't understand the nature of Obama's appeal. He doesn't understand the disconnect between that appeal and Obama's policies. He doesn't grasp the effectiveness of a strategy to exploit that disconnect. And at the end of the day, his advice to Obama is to play up that disconnect for all he's worth and showcase his weakness.

Ach, its not Bernstein. Or not just Bernstein. He's par for the course. The entire 'moderate/centrist' American political class is just an endless multi-car wreck. What can you say about a world where Charles Friedman wins a Pulitzer, Christopher Hitchens is still sort of respected, David Frum publishes a book and Maureen Dowd gets a column. All I can say is it's Jared Bernstein's world.

Clearly, no sane political party will tie its hands by attacking opponents on the basis of facts. Facts are few, and not all convenient, while so many superb attacks can be launched if we disregard them!

Democrats are not sane, so they are usually hindered by facts. In fact, it is a straighjacket: how to simultaneously adhere to facts and to pe-conceptions that serve as "common wisdom" in the media.

I'm sure the Republicans are dusting off that old picture of Willy Horton for use in the campaign against Obama, and of course there's Obama's middle name, Hussein. But then McCain and his gang will have to say our old ally King Hussein of Jordan was all the horrid things Hussein Obama supposedly is.

When McCain tries to excuse the horrible record of their 6 years control of the government, the scandals, the corruption, the hypocrisy on fiscal and gay issues by claiming; 'We lost our way, my friends", the comeback should be; "You didn't lose your way, what we got from you is what you are."

Actually I think it's a very valid attack on Obama and one that Hillary herself would neglect at her peril.

We are moving into very dark and troubled waters and the rhythmic stroking of platitudes will not be enough to see the nation through them.

I think it says volumes about the present, desperate state of the American psyche that content-less speeches, well delivered by someone with such a tiny CV, could sweep all before them.

Those whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad.

McCain will run a two level attack on Obama. The "official" campaign will be on a high policy level designed to attract independents: McCain was right (so far) on the surge, McCain stands for tax cuts (now), McCain has experience, etc. (There will, of course, be the usual surrogate pandering to the right wing - abortion, gay marriage, etc., but not directly from McCain.)

The "unofficial" campaign will have "unaffiliated grass root" attacks on race, religion (both Obama's church and his being a supposed crypto-Muslim), liberalism, etc.

But, there is a way to fight back, and Obama started last night. Everything will be the "Bush-McCain" policies (tax cuts, the war, etc.).

I think whoever the Dem candidate is should start getting ready to dispute the "sound and proven ideas" McCains' going to keep mentioning. McCain will put forth the same old Republican uncontested bullshit we've been hearing since 1980; economic expansion, taxes, security, jobs, downsizing government, etc.

Republicans are masters at dissembling; One example is Reagan's tax cuts mentioned over and over, but never mentioned are the times he raised taxes...what was it 5 or 6 times? The Dem candidate should be ready to dispute or offer comparisons to McCain's shop worn bullshit.

And lets not forget the scandals in the Reagan years. HUD, EPA, leveraged buy outs with resultant closing of companies with loss of jobs, S&L, and Iran/Contra. Not much has changed under Bush/Cheney, has it?

His speeches are just really eloquent speeches. He rallies the troops (so to speak). McCain's speeches are not only empty of content but they're boring.

Get Obama and McCain in a head-to-head debate and see who is empty of content.

Obama's campaign has been so successful partly because they keep a close eye on what the voters are thinking then respond rapidly and effectively. The other candidates haven't demonstrated they can do that.

Have you noticed Obama using the litigator's technique of starting off with 'others have said such and such about me' and then countering the argument. When the opponent says such and such, it is not something new and listeners think 'but Obama shot that down already'.

Maybe they seem like "platitudes" to John McCain because John McCain has been in office too long. I mean, everyone gets burnt out.

It's not a characteristic I'd be looking for in someone running for president but who am I to tell the Republicans who their candidate should be?

What ails this country is that the people have allowed self-interested parties to distract us from policies that are to our advantage and to the disadvantage of the parties doing the distracting. The policies that benefit us aren't mysterious. Getting from here to there is as simple as taking a step. What the problem has been all these years is that we have been distracted by fears and shiny objects dangled in front of us by large forces that don't want us to see that there is a simple step that we could take that would be very beneficial. That step is the progressive platform. All three of the major Democratic candidates, in some form or other, have presented that platform. What separates Obama from the pack is that he presents a cohesive and powerful vision strong enough to overwhelm the fears and shiny objects. That is what has been missing. Not policy details, but the power to persuade. He is the right wing's worst nightmare – a progressive who won't be marginalized.